I don't think you got the GP's point, even though you say you agree. While YC does give you some funds, if you don't have a programmer working for equity, it isn't nearly enough to pay someone to do the technical work. However, if you include the $150K convertible note through the Start Fund, it does become more possible.
Edit: No longer mentioning stuff that isn't essential to my post
Edit: I'm specifically disputing "And that's precisely what incubators like YC are out to solve; the issue of upfront cash flow to fund start ups." The post you were responding to just said that they don't do that well, at least if you have to pay a programmer (although the Start Fund would help with this.)
>"The post you were responding to just said that they don't do that well"
Perhaps not. But I think the premise behind the incubator is to allow coders with ideas to get them off the ground. Obviously, these founders are required to do the actual work. It's sort of a special case. I'm not even sure it makes sense from a non-technical standpoint. Has anyone ever been accepted to YC on a non-technical basis? I know Tech Stars accepted someone...that didn't end well.
>"Entrepreneurship is simply not enough, when all you have is 18k to work with spread among every single cost the company will have, until it's profitable enough to pay for coders: who are very expensive."
That's the point I got; it's pretty hard to fund a tech start up with a non-technical partner when there isn't a whole of money. Nor can a non-coder do it alone, because he would have to pay programmers. And I agree.
Edit: for civility's sake. Glad the internet allows take backs!
Edit: No longer mentioning stuff that isn't essential to my post
Edit: I'm specifically disputing "And that's precisely what incubators like YC are out to solve; the issue of upfront cash flow to fund start ups." The post you were responding to just said that they don't do that well, at least if you have to pay a programmer (although the Start Fund would help with this.)